Casio EX-FS10 vs EX-S200: Hands-On Comparison of Two Pocketable Powerhouses

When it comes to ultra-compact cameras that slip into your pocket without a fuss, Casio’s Exilim lineup offers some intriguing options from the late 2000s and early 2010s. Today, I’m diving deep into two siblings from this series: the EX-FS10 (announced early 2009) and the EX-S200 (released mid-2010). While neither will rival a modern mirrorless powerhouse, both cameras boast some interesting features that warrant a closer look - especially for enthusiasts on a budget or those in need of quick, travel-friendly shooters.

Having personally tested hundreds of cameras spanning entry-level point-and-shoots to professional rigs, I’m bringing that hands-on experience here to help you understand how these two Casios stack up against each other across various photographic disciplines and real-world use. Both are distinctly compact with fixed lenses, but with enough specification differences to influence how you might use them.

Let’s unpack their strengths and limitations and see which one earns your hard-earned cash.

Pocket Size and Handling: How Small Is Small Enough?

Since portability is the key selling point for both cameras, it’s worth comparing their physical size and handling first.

At roughly 102 x 55 x 20 mm and 121 grams, the EX-FS10 feels like a sleek little brick, while the EX-S200 trims slightly to 100 x 55 x 18 mm and weighs in just a tad heavier at 132 grams. Both are ultra-compact when compared to DSLRs or mirrorless cameras with interchangeable lenses, but you can feel a subtle difference in depth and grip comfort.

From my testing, the EX-S200’s slightly thinner and more tapered body edges fit better in the hand despite being heavier - giving it a bit more purchase and stability if you dislike fiddling with tiny controls. In contrast, the EX-FS10 leans into a straightforward block design, which may appeal if you appreciate straightforward simplicity over sculpting.

Ergonomically, neither camera features adjustable grip molds or custom buttons; this is genuinely “point and shoot” territory where quick snaps beat fine control. Both lack viewfinders, relying purely on their LCD screens for composition.

Speaking of which…

Controls on both cameras are minimal but practical: mode dials and shutter release are easy to access, though neither excels in offering tactile feedback. The EX-S200 introduces some convenience improvements in button placement, but if you’re a “clubs for thumbs” kind of shooter, you won’t find much difference.

Bottom Line: Both cameras are genuinely pocket-friendly choices, with the EX-S200 offering a marginal edge in handling comfort for longer shooting sessions.

Screens and Interfaces: Composing Without a Viewfinder

Neither camera offers an electronic or optical viewfinder, which is common for slim ultra-compacts in this era. Instead, they rely on rear LCDs.

The EX-FS10 sports a 2.5-inch fixed LCD with a modest 230,000-dot resolution. The EX-S200 bumps the screen size gently to 2.7 inches but keeps the same resolution. The bigger screen on the EX-S200 translates to a slightly easier viewing experience in bright conditions but nothing groundbreaking.

Neither screen is a touchscreen, and neither has articulated or tilting mechanisms. This can be a dealbreaker if you like shooting at unorthodox angles or selfies (and neither is selfie-friendly - no rotating screens here).

I appreciated the EX-S200’s more responsive menu navigation and a slightly sleeker UI afforded by the more advanced Exilim Engine 5.0 processor. The EX-FS10's interface feels a bit dated, which can cause minor frustration when digging into settings (though casual shooters may never venture beyond auto modes anyway).

Verdict: For framing and reviewing your shots, the EX-S200 offers a modest improvement in screen real estate and UI fluidity. Both fall short of modern standards but are serviceable for casual use.

Sensor, Image Quality, and Resolution: The Heart of the Matter

Here’s where things get technically interesting and also where you discern significant practical differences.

Both cameras house a 1/2.3-inch sensor measuring 6.17 x 4.55 mm, offering roughly 28.07mm² in area - not large by any stretch, but standard fare for compact cameras of their time. The EX-FS10 uses a CMOS sensor, while the EX-S200 features a CCD sensor, each technology with pros and cons:

• CMOS sensors generally offer better low-light performance and faster readout speeds but were less mature back then.
• CCD sensors traditionally excel in color depth and image quality but tend to suffer from higher power consumption and less impressive noise control at high ISO.

Resolution-wise the EX-S200 beats the EX-FS10 handily: 14 megapixels (4320 x 3240 pixels) vs 9 megapixels (3456 x 2592 pixels). In real-world shooting, this translates to finer detail capture and the ability to print larger or crop more aggressively without significant quality loss.

Regarding ISO ranges, the EX-FS10 tops out at ISO 1600, while the EX-S200 stretches to ISO 3200 with a lower base ISO of 50. However, image noise at high ISO in these compact cameras is generally undesirable, and I found the EX-S200’s noise reduction a tad heavy-handed, leading to smeared fine details at ISO 1600 and above. The EX-FS10 produces grainier but slightly crisper images under those conditions.

Neither camera supports RAW image capture, which limits post-processing flexibility and is worth noting for serious shooters.

In balanced daylight conditions, both deliver punchy, vibrant images better suited for casual sharing than professional-grade work. The EX-S200’s higher resolution sensor wins on sharpness, but the EX-FS10 can edge ahead in certain skin tone rendering due to CMOS sensor nuances.

Autofocus and Performance: Speed and Accuracy on a Budget

Autofocus performance is key even on compact cameras.

The EX-FS10 uses contrast-detection AF with single-shot focus only - no continuous or tracking autofocus, which isn’t surprising given the era and category. It offers center-weighted and spot metering but no face or eye detection.

The EX-S200 has a similar system - single contrast-detection AF with center-weighted metering, no advanced subject-tracking features.

From field tests covering both portrait sessions and some street snapshots, both cameras show average AF speeds with the EX-S200 being a bit snappier, thanks to its newer processor. However, hunting can occur in low contrast or low light. Neither will win medals in wildlife or sports photography given the lack of AF tracking and burst shooting modes.

When it comes to continuous shooting, you’re out of luck on both - no high frame rates or buffer for action sequences.

Lens Versatility and Optical Characteristics

Lenses are fixed on both cameras, with a 5.8x crop factor applied to the listed focal lengths.

• EX-FS10: 38-114mm equivalent zoom with max apertures of f/3.9 to f/7.1
• EX-S200: 27-108mm equivalent zoom with max apertures of f/3.2 to f/5.9

The EX-S200 has a wider-angle starting point at 27mm vs 38mm on the EX-FS10 - significantly better for landscapes and architecture.

As always, wider apertures aid low-light and depth-of-field control. The EX-S200’s brighter f/3.2 at wide angle gives an edge in gathering light and subject separation over the EX-FS10’s f/3.9, though by no means does either create creamy bokeh akin to larger sensor cameras.

Neither offers macro focus distance specifics, but both allow close-up shots typical of point-and-shoots.

Built-in sensor-shift image stabilization on the EX-S200 is a notable advantage, helping reduce blur from hand shake especially at telephoto ends and slower shutter speeds - a feature completely absent on the EX-FS10.

Comprehensive Performance Across Photography Genres

Let’s consider performance across popular photography genres, bearing in mind the limitations of ultra-compacts from this period.

Casio EX FS10 front Casio EX FS10 screen back Casio EX S200 front Casio EX S200 screen back

Portrait Photography

• Skin tones on the EX-S200 are more nuanced due to higher resolution and CCD color sensitivity.
• EX-S200’s brighter aperture helps blur backgrounds slightly more, but neither camera competes with larger sensor mirrorless systems for true bokeh.
• Eye detection autofocus is absent on both - manual focus is needed for critical portraiture.
• EX-FS10’s CMOS sensor produces decent contrast that can flatter faces in natural light.

Landscape Photography

• The EX-S200’s 27mm wide-angle provides much more expansive framing than the EX-FS10’s 38mm start, which feels a little cropped.
• Both struggle in dynamic range and shadow recovery, so pick well-exposed scenes.
• No weather sealing on either, so watch out for moisture and grit on outdoor adventures.
• EX-S200’s sensor stabilization benefits hand-held landscape shots; EX-FS10 requires a tripod more often.

Wildlife and Sports

• Neither camera is optimized for wildlife or sports due to slower AF and no burst modes.
• The EX-FS10’s 38-114mm zoom offers slightly more reach than the EX-S200 (max 108mm), but for serious telephoto work, an interchangeable lens system is preferred.
• EX-S200’s superior AF speed may edge it marginally ahead for quick snaps.

Street Photography

• Small size and discreet styling suit both models.
• EX-S200’s wider-angle lens favors environmental street shots, while the EX-FS10 feels a bit telephoto.
• LCD screens are tough to see in bright light but manageable.
• Both lack silent shutter options, which affects stealth.

Macro Photography

• Both cameras lack specific macro modes; close focusing distances suffice for casual macro.
• EX-S200’s stabilization aids detail capture, especially in handheld close shots.
• Neither offer focus bracketing or stacking.

Night and Astro Photography

• Limited high ISO performance hinders low-light capture.
• Max shutter speeds are 1/1250s (EX-FS10) and 1/2000s (EX-S200), but neither supports long exposure or bulb modes.
• Both lack RAW files, limiting post-processing recovery.
• Neither supports special astro or night scene modes.

Video Capabilities

• EX-FS10 supports 1280 x 720 HD video at 30fps, plus slow-motion options at lower resolutions.
• EX-S200 maxes at 640 x 480 VGA video at 30fps.
• Both use Motion JPEG, which consumes storage quickly.
• Neither have microphone input or headphone outputs.
• No in-body electronic stabilization for video, only sensor-shift stabilization (EX-S200) benefits stills.

Travel Photography

• Portability is the big win here.
• EX-S200’s bigger zoom range and wider angle suit versatile shooting.
• Both cameras have modest battery life (no official rated specs), but EX-S200’s newer NP-120 battery is reportedly more enduring.
• EX-FS10 supports Eye-Fi wireless cards for easy photo transfer, a neat feature missing on the EX-S200.
• Storage slots are similar, with SD/SDHC support.

Professional Work

• Neither camera targets professional workflows.
• No RAW support, limited manual controls, lack of tethering, and subpar image quality restrict their usefulness.
• File format and color management options are limited.
• Reliability is typical Casio compact standard, not build tough enough for arduous professional use.

Technical Deep Dive: Autofocus, Stabilization, and Processing

I must highlight some technical choices that influence day-to-day experience:

• The EX-FS10’s contrast-detection AF is basic and sufficient for static subjects in good light, but drive it in low light or moving subjects, and frustration grows.
• EX-S200’s Exilim Engine 5.0 improves noise reduction and image processing speed.
• Sensor-shift stabilization on EX-S200 is rare for this category and genuinely noticeable; it tangibly reduces blur in low light.
• Lack of face detection on both is a sore point considering that many contemporaries embraced at least basic face detect AF.
• USB 2.0 connectivity on both allows transfer, but only EX-FS10 has HDMI output for display on TVs.
• No GPS modules on either, limiting geo-tagging.

Pricing and Value: Which One Makes More Sense Today?

Although the original launch prices differ - with the EX-FS10 at around $200 and the EX-S200 not officially priced here - on the used market, both cameras sell for bargain-basement sums, often under $100.

Given their age and technology, these are best suited to those who value ultra-compact simplicity over cutting-edge performance. If you want a fun second camera or a minimalist travel companion, these fit the bill with compromises.

Value-wise:

Scoring Their Strengths and Weaknesses

Having extensively tested and analyzed, here is my performance rating framework:

• EX-S200 generally wins on image quality, stabilization, and lens versatility.
• EX-FS10 offers basic HD video and Eye-Fi wireless support but lags in image sharpness and handling.

Breaking down score by photography type clarifies user suitability:

So, Which Casio Should You Choose?

Go for the EX-S200 if you:

• Need the widest-angle lens to capture landscapes and interiors
• Want higher resolution images with sensor-shift stabilization
• Prefer better battery life and a more comfortable grip
• Don’t need HD video and value still image quality over video specs
• Are okay losing wireless transfer and HDMI output

Consider the EX-FS10 if you:

• Want HD video capability (720p at 30fps) and slow-motion options
• Need Eye-Fi card compatibility for wireless workflow
• Prefer a tiny digital companion that handles common snaps
• Are on a tighter budget and can live with lesser image resolution
• Shoot portraits occasionally and don’t mind slower, basic AF

Final Thoughts: Retro Compact Charm With Modern Limitations

Both cameras feel like a snapshot of an era when pocket cameras were king and smartphone photography was in its infancy. Their simplicity, size, and budget price open the door for casual shooters or collectors, but their shortcomings in autofocus sophistication, image quality, and video make them less appealing if you demand more from your gear.

Personally, I lean slightly toward the EX-S200 for its more refined still imaging performance and better optical range, but if video or Eye-Fi Wi-Fi connectivity is important, the EX-FS10 stands its ground.

If you want my honest advice: these cameras illuminate the leaps made in the years since. For under a hundred bucks, they are delightful backup tools or introduction cameras - but for serious enthusiasts, modern compacts or entry-level mirrorless cameras represent better investments today.

Happy shooting either way!

If you want to dive deeper into specific shooting scenarios or have any questions about handling vintage compact cameras like these, drop a comment! I’m passionate about helping photography lovers make balanced, informed choices without breaking the bank.

Appendix: Summary Pros and Cons

References

• Official Casio product info archives
• Personal practical tests over several shooting sessions
• User feedback from Casio enthusiast forums
• Technical sensor and lens data sheets

Thanks for reading! May your next camera be the perfect blend of fun and functionality.